Brief Summary
This video features Noam Chomsky discussing his views on Sam Harris, islamophobia, and the global war on terror. Chomsky dismisses Harris's views as "hysterical slander" and argues that islamophobia is a serious problem that undermines the West, leading to counterproductive strategies like the "global war on terror." He advocates for a rational and humane approach to dealing with terrorism, emphasizing understanding the roots of the problem rather than simply resorting to violence.
- Chomsky dismisses Sam Harris's views as "hysterical slander."
- He considers islamophobia a serious problem that undermines the West.
- Chomsky advocates for a rational and humane approach to dealing with terrorism.
Sam Harris and Islamophobia
Chomsky responds to Sam Harris's preference for Ben Carson as president due to Carson's perceived understanding of the threat from "Jihadi terrorists." Chomsky dismisses Harris's views as "hysterical slanderous charges" and asserts that he is more concerned with Jihadi terrorism than Harris. He emphasizes the importance of understanding the roots of terrorism rather than simply reacting with aggression. When asked about the rise of islamophobia and whether figures like Harris are guilty of anti-Muslim bigotry, Chomsky states that while he doesn't believe this is true of Dawkins, it may have been true of Hitchens in his later years, and that Harris's statements often appear that way.
The Seriousness of Islamophobia
Chomsky addresses the problem of islamophobia, comparing it to anti-Semitism but noting that islamophobia is currently a more significant issue. He argues that islamophobia harms both Muslims and the West, leading to harmful proposals like carpet bombing. He critiques the "global war on terror" as a sledgehammer approach that has only expanded the problem of terrorism. Chomsky points out that the global war on terror, initiated 15 years prior, has only served to spread terrorism across the globe, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya.
A Rational Approach to Terrorism
Chomsky advocates for a rational and humane approach to dealing with terrorism, citing experts like Scott Atran and William Polk. He argues that a rational approach is necessary for both humanitarian reasons and for the security of the West.
